Update E-F/SA Bird Build...

[oldskool]

Originally Posted by Alan Nyhus

The Schbeck ceramic puck lifters are now mfgd. by Smith Machine...lots of people use those. Very good non-ceramic lifters tool streel are available from Trend, PPPC and others. Another good one that won't break the bank are the modified Delphi lifters that have the bonded steel foot.

Well, I'll just go ahead and plead ignorant, and admit my dummy status. I Googled Smith Machine, Trend and PPPC and didn't see any business that looked like they would be a seller of lifters. I did find some cheap Delphi lifters on Ebay. Don't think that's the Stocker lifters that were mentioned. One source said the Delphi lifters are made by Johnson.

So, would somebody please have mercy on an old guy and give some links or at least more exact info that might lead to a website for these lifter sources ?

Next question: Do most guys now use Bullet and CC for their Stocker cams ? Or, are there other brands out there that lots of guys use ? Back in the old days we all used Lunati. I reckin they're stayin in business selling Voodoo cams for low comp engines, now.

THANKS !

[Dave Noll]

Try these. I cant find the smith site anymore.

http://trendperform.com/?go=products&type=lifter

http://pppcenter.com/

Edit: Found this one

http://schubeckracing.com/

Edit 2: Found this but its in the UK.???

http://www.fbo-uk.com/Composite%20lifters.htm

[brent flynn]

yea, its really a 266/272 @ .050 ...hehe Its pretty big, and it should wake my combo up, as im only running a real soft lobe with 251/256 right now...and hoping the lighter 350 trans, and some tuning, and maybe restalling the converter, will help me see some real ET gains... IT'll be interesting, to say the least. No ceramic puck lifters for me... im goin with a limited travel(.015) style lifter.

[oldskool]

Originally Posted by Dave Noll

Try these. I cant find the smith site anymore.

http://trendperform.com/?go=products&type=lifter

http://pppcenter.com/

Edit: Found this one

http://schubeckracing.com/

Edit 2: Found this but its in the UK.???

http://www.fbo-uk.com/Composite%20lifters.htm

Of these sites, the only Pontiac Stocker lifters I can find are the former Shubecks. They're now called SM Composite lifters.The last link above shows a 541 area code phone number. The 541 area code is from the state of Oregon.

They show some Olds lifters, with .015" of travel. The Olds and Pontiac are supposed to be the same. They are supposed to have a chat line. But I couldn't raise anybody. Daytime only maybe. They did show a price of $720 + shipping. Are all the competitive Stocker guys paying that much for lifters ?

Not sure if they would come from the UK or Oregon or where. There seems to be some sort of weird mystery involved with these stocker lifters. It seems that everybody is using either tool steel or the Shubeck style, but I have not seen a link to a GOOD site that has 'em listed. So, exactly where the heck are you guys buying these super duper legal hyd Stocker lifters ?

There has got to be a decent link to a good source, if most Stockers are using them. Since it is no secret that everybody is using them, it shouldn't be a secret where to buy 'em. IMO

[brent flynn]

there are some guys using "Sherman" lifters... that's the type im gonna use...im not putting 700+ in lifters... im not trying to set records...hehe

[Alan Nyhus]

Here's the contact info for Cliff Sherman:
Sherman Racing Products
P.O. Box 1326
Donaldsonville, LA 70346
(225)473-4923, (225)717-1460, (225)717-1461

Bullet Cams keeps some Sherman lifters in stock. John at Bullet takes care of the 'stocker' cams...make sure and ask for him. (662)893-5670 -Al

[oldskool]

OK, all this talk about Stocker cams and lifters, brings up some more dummy questions. So ya'll have patience with me please.

(1) Have the index numbers got so low that it is now an absolute necessity to run these ridiculous cams, which require tool steel lifters and high spring pressures, in order to run the index or slightly under ?

(2) Exactly how much spring pressure is too much for regular non-tool steel lifters ?

(3) For a Pontiac 455 engine that shouldn't need to go over 6000rpm to run the number, would it be possible to reduce the cam duration enuff to use low enuff spring pressure to run non-tool steel lifters ?

Just a dummy observation: It appears to me as tho a Stocker cam / lifters / springs will cost as much if not more than a solid roller set-up. To me, there is something about it that just ain't right. Back in the day, we started out in Stock, then some worked up to SS, then Modified Production, etc. But today it takes big bucks to build a quick Stocker. But then, I don't have to tell you guys that.

But the rules are what they are. So I reckin you either play by the rules or choose another game. I suppose that's one reason most today run bracket instead of class. They can build a quicker car, cheaper, and not have to worry about an index or tear downs. The goal is just low RT's and consistent ET's.

This is just an opinion question for you guys who have been around Stocker racing for a long time. Why do you suppose NHRA didn't just leave the cam rule as "exact factory specs". The hp factors could compensate for engines that came with small cams. The cam grinders have the ability to grind 'em that way. So how did the Stocker cam rule get so out of hand ? What was the purpose of making the Stockers so quick ? There are higher classes, if you wanna go quicker. My thinking is that there would be a lot more Stockers if they were closer to actually being stock. And this would have kept a lot more tracks running a Stock / SS class.

[Dwight Southerland]

oldskool - My observations that may give insight into your questions.

1) Valve spring pressure and not camshaft duration is the major factor in the skyrocketed cost of stocker valve trains. The reason we have such radical camshafts is the result of being able to have the valve spring pressure to accomodate the increased rates of lift and elevated engine RPM.
2) Likely the cost of enforcing camshaft specs and valve spring pressure is the reason NHRA elected to change the rules. It takes a lot of time for education of technical staff, cost for maintaining the staff and increased office support to insure that consistency is adhered to in the field for checking camshafts for duration and overlap. The number of stories of questionable certification procedures from back when they did check duration and overlap would be an indication of how difficult it is to maintain the procedures. Also, there are many political and technical issues behind keeping that process in place that are not easily solved. 'Not easy' means money and time. For NHRA to continue the Stock eliminator, it is much easier with fewer cost implications to do lift and that is all.
3) IMHO a limit of valve spring pressure would lessen the cost of engine building in many areas and I wish they would do that. Checking valve spring pressure is not that difficult in the field. Certainly no more difficult than checking camshaft lift.
4) Standard lifters run into questionable reliability over 130 lbs on the seat and about 350 lbs over the nose. You can do more than that successfully, but you need to follow some definite processes. The NASCAR community ran flat tappet cams for years without the benefit of tool steel or ceramic lifters and there is a boat load of information about how to maximize use.
5) Depending on the combination you race, the super expensive valve train is not necessary to be competitive. Most common 283, 327 and 350 SBC combinations do because the development of the technology from so many racers has pushed the standard of performance to a level that requires those parts. BBC solid lifter engines are the same.
6) It is not the duration that makes the requirement of the tool steel or composite lifters, it is the rate of lift and the valve spring pressure. And you need the valve spring pressure to operate in high RPM ranges. We used to run 260-275 degrees duration back in the days of stock valve spring specs on certain engines, but the rates of lift of the camshafts were much milder and we didn't run the RPM levels that are common today. At 6000 RPM on your Pontiac engine, you could be judicious with valve train weight and get by with valve springs that would not require tool steel or ceramic lifters if you don't get nuts with rates of lift on the camshaft.

More for you to think about and get a clearer perspective.

[Sean Marconette]

Some of the issue that have us where we are is allowing unlimited spring pressure. The trick lifters with ceramic pucks require more spring pressure. Otherwise if they are not controlled the puck shatters and tears up the engine requiring a rebuild. With unlimited spring pressure a more aggressive cam lobe can be used and the lifter will stay in contact. Tool steel trick lifters for my combo 8 years ago cost around $700. Now we are allowed roller rockers too, so every rule change that allows something, opens a can of worms. Being able to run under the index costs money. How far under dictates if it's a soft combo or not. Most of us test a lot in order to refine what we have. I test more than I race, as my combo is not underrated like some of the other combos available.

Dwight types faster than I do!

Sorry Brent if I hyjacked your thread! Keep plugging away at it. If it was easy there would not be any challenge to making your car run well. Challenge in Stock usually means $$$

Sean

[oldskool]

Hey THANKS ya'll ! That's some REAL good info. !

I never even considered that NHRA would allow these crazy cams and spring pressures just because it would make teching easier. With all the tales I've heard about teardowns, I just assumed that they wanted to check everything they could on the winners and national record cars.

I figured that by now they had every kind of measuring and checking device and procedure that could possibly be needed to check every minute detail of an engine, at the track. And, as mentioned, the spring pressures would be easy to check.

Maybe they think that by doing less checking and measuring, they will make fewer guys mad, and keep 'em coming back to race. I can see where detailed teardowns, requiring precise measurements, would definitely keep most guys away from Stocker racing. With that in mind, they may start doing fewer and less detailed teardowns, as time goes on, just to keep the car count up. Ya think ?

It may evolve into a sort of "stock appearing" class.